To Flash or not to Flash ... that is the question (1 Viewer)

I've experimented a bit with bird photography but I've never used a camera flash as yet on birds. Looked at a few posts and there seems to be three trains of thought on this:

1. Only do fill flash and only when the subject is already well lit from natural light just to cancel the shadows
2. Don't use flash when subject not already well lit as will spook the birds to the detriment of the birds and other bird watchers
3. Use flash for primary target (not just fill but to illuminate fully) since no evidence birds are affected negatively

So there seems to be some divided opinions on the merits and demerits of using flash.

I also noted in some cases flash abuse where some amateur photographers clearly repeatedly baited birds and subjected them to extreme flash photography for extended periods when there was a material risk of harming the birds (mainly hummers). But I guess everything that can be done safely can also be abused by a careless few.

Regarding equipment, if using flash, I'm guessing that the flash extender accessory is necessary.

So before I jump into this area, would appreciate your thoughts. First and foremost, I want no harm to the birds.

Rashid

rka said:

I've experimented a bit with bird photography but I've never used a camera flash as yet on birds. Looked at a few posts and there seems to be three trains of thought on this:

1. Only do fill flash and only when the subject is already well lit from natural light just to cancel the shadows
2. Don't use flash when subject not already well lit as will spook the birds to the detriment of the birds and other bird watchers
3. Use flash for primary target (not just fill but to illuminate fully) since no evidence birds are affected negatively

So there seems to be some divided opinions on the merits and demerits of using flash.

That there are different views is not a surprise. There also seems to be a "cultural" difference between the "Old World" and the "New World". Tricky business to sort out the commentators that write from own experience or based on solid sources, and those that just rewrite what they have read or heard or think they did hear from someone else. From my experience I can say that there are birds (species) that do not care about a flash going off, other birds will show a response (like what was that) and go back to normal, other birds take off (but never in a way that I would describe as a panicky escape). But I have never used a flash at night (e.g. on owls, and on those I never will) or other extreme low light conditions.

I also noted in some cases flash abuse where some amateur photographers clearly repeatedly baited birds and subjected them to extreme flash photography for extended periods when there was a material risk of harming the birds (mainly hummers).


Can you substantiate above statement? I am aware of photographers (nothing to do with pro or amateur) as well as birders doing harm by getting to close or staying to long, using sound recording excessively. All without flashs involved.

But I guess everything that can be done safely can also be abused by a careless few.

Regarding equipment, if using flash, I'm guessing that the flash extender accessory is necessary.

Depending on the situation a flash extender is not a must. If you are close enough, or you just need a little bit of fill the bare flash will do. I have used the camera's pop-up flash for fill flash when shooting with a 500mm lens. Not great, but the results were better than without fill flash.

So before I jump into this area, would appreciate your thoughts. First and foremost, I want no harm to the birds.

You found already some post on the topic and got thoughts on it. Guess now you will have to develop your own view and find out what works for you, in your environment, with your local bird species. If you pay attention to the behavior of the birds in response to shutter noise and flash going off you will be able to tell if they are stressed or even distressed by you and your doings. Use common sense and have fun.


Rashid

Click to expand...

Ulli

Maybe only to light up shadows, if you can't unique them. If flash light is significanltly stronger then natural one, pictures get flat and don't look well. So only as supplemental light source as you wrote. Or if you take picture of detail of a bird.
I don't have big experience, but sometimes flash light seems to be necessary in deep forest - to reduce exposition time. Otherwise pictures would be unsharp (shaken). Or in hollow for example.
Common Treecreeper Certhia familiaris in the first attachment was shot many years ago using only one flash (and infrared pilot - this is why composition is a little coincidental and lens was focused not exactly where should be ...). The green forest background is too dark (flash light too strong), shadows in the hollow (actually behind the bark of dead alder trunk) are black. And entire picture is flat. So the best choice would be to use at least 2 flashes - one in front (maybe ring flash) and second one from aside making impression of depth. I was standing there few hours with pilot in the hand observing birds through binoculars, mosquitos almost ate me in that swampy alder forest and only such pictures ...
Unfortunatelly flash is absolutelly necessary in the night (second attachment with elks in Kawuneeche valley).
Those new flashes have computers and calculate themselves time, trigger slave flash or flashes.
It is difficult to use two flashes in a field. Maybe second flash on the boom (arm) ? I think that I saw such photographers on TV many years ago. And they had something attached to flashes reducing angle of beam (increasing guide number).
Flashes calculate themselves parameters, but it is very easy. For example if F number for sunlight alone is 5.6, for flash alone is 5.6, for sun+flash is Sqrt(5.6^2+5.6^2) = 8.
For two flashes 5.6 and 11 in the night is Sqrt(5.6^2+11^2)=12.36=11+1/3
But I don't know what is optimal difference between shadow and light. In this case it would be 1/3 if 11 is "front" flash unit and 5.6 is "side" flash:
parts of field lighted by both flashes (from front and flank): 11+1/3
parts of field lighted only by 11 (from front only - shadows): 11
(third attachment)

seaspirit said:

Ulli

Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback, much appreciated!

Regarding substantiating the statement, really can't since it is just a summary of a couple of the posts I have read on other websites. I'll get the links and share since they make interesting reading. One of the sites seemed pretty credible though.

Based on all the feedback, I'll probably give it a try.

I'm very much in favor of using a flash. It has three functions:
-Fill flash can be used to fill shadows and reduce harsh contrast
-Flash provides a nice catchlight in the eye producing better images
-Flash can help to freeze motion of rapidly moving subjects

Some subjects do not work well with flash. Sometimes it is the eye - which lights up unnaturally. Other times it's the fur or feathers. You'll need to develop an understanding through experience.

Using flash can harm some subjects - like nocturnal owls. But it usually has no impact on daylight subjects. Hummingbirds are typically photographed with multiple flashes, artificial backgrounds, and a feeder to attract the subject. It does not harm the bird and they freely return to the feeder in spite of the flashes. Virtually every published image of hummers is with flash.

The rule of thumb is to use flash conservatively and if there is any sign of adverse behavior, stop immediately. Don't use a flash with nocturnal subjects unless you are sure there is no harm. Don't use a powerful flash with baby birds. Keep the flash power down - use just what you need for fill or to create a catchlight.

I generally use a flash extender for 300+mm lenses and distant subjects. A Flash extended will double the power of your flash providing more light on the subject. You need to be careful with shorter lenses since the filed of view is wider and may not be covered by the flash.

It can also just come down to personal choice. I never personally worried about all the debate as to flash's merits or side effects mostly because I simply PREFER to photograph birds without one. There might be some difference between folks who are seeking to 'document' birds and want perfect, almost studio-staged-looking shots with no shadows to see every conceivable feather detail and color, and can't miss out on anything...and folks like me who are lovers of photography and happen to like birds as a primary subject. My goal, therefore, isn't to capture technical studies of birds without flaw, but to capture real-world bird photos, going about their various lives. Since shadows exist in that world, I have no problem capturing them. There's nothing wrong with either approach - it's just the way I prefer to capture it - I actually like shadows - I like the dimensions they give, I like the way they document time of day, I even like the way they sometimes do shade or cover part of the bird's face or body, if it's realistic to what I was seeing at that time.

I'm also admittedly lucky that Florida is a very sunny, bright place - so not only do we often have powerful illumination, but we even usually get a natural 'catchlight' in the eye just from the sun...so the only real need for flash here would be if you wanted to eliminate shadows and hard contrast. Since I like those things, I don't use flash.

Decide if you want to use flash or not. If you don't, no worries. If you do, then follow your own set of reasonable guidelines as Eric mentions above - if you know you're not causing adverse or unnatural behavior, continue - if you notice that you have caused any disturbance or interruption, cease immediately.

hi Rashid,
If you have a quick look at my gallery-all the recent pics posted in New york
this May were taken with flash and flash extender.All were in fill flash mode and although
I would rather not use flash at all,many if not most of these pictures would
not have been possible without it.(some worked better than others!)
All handheld D7000 300AFS+ 1.4 telecon.

Best wishes
Mark

They are beatiful. The lamp made them flat and sometimes additionally very dark shadow is visible, but probably without lamp pictures would be blured because of long exposition time and colors would be not so saturated.

jascha777 said:

hi Rashid,
If you have a quick look at my gallery-all the recent pics posted in New york
this May were taken with flash and flash extender.All were in fill flash mode and although
I would rather not use flash at all,many if not most of these pictures would
not have been possible without it.(some worked better than others!)
All handheld D7000 300AFS+ 1.4 telecon.

Best wishes
Mark

Click to expand...

Really nice photos. The White Eyed Vireo is my fave!

FW: Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Birds-of-Paradise project

I suspect you can ask 10 people and get 10 different views, all equally valid. I don't think you will do the birds any harm so my suggestion would be just get out and try it with your existing equipment, with and without flash, and see what works best for you